Indian diplomat’s arrest in US: Media coverage and some intriguing questions & answers

Devyani Khobragade, deputy consul general at the consulate general of India in New York was arrested, handcuffed; strip and cavity searched in custody and made to stand with common criminals, drug addicts and sex workers by the New York Police. More than these indignities, the associated actions connected with the incident enacted by various US departments raise a number of questions and suspicions.

The Special Agent, United State Department of State, Bureau of Diplomatic Security specifies two charges based on which he has required the United States Magistrate Judge, Southern District of New York to issue a warrant of arrest for the diplomat. The first charge relates to visa fraud. The charge alleges that the diplomat under oath had made a false statement in the employment contract (First Employment Contract) submitted in support of visa application in respect of Sangeeta Richard, employed for working as a domestic worker with her in New York. The second charge concerns a false statement in the employment contract (First Employment Contract) stating that she would pay $4500 US dollars as monthly salary whereas she actually paid $573 US dollars as per a subsequent contract (Second Employment Contract) signed shortly before her departure to New York.

The salary of most of the Indian diplomats in US is around Rs 3 lakh per month and Devyani herself is not getting more than Rs 4 lakh per month. How could she afford to pay $4500 US dollars per month to her domestic help which amounts to approximately Rs 2.8 lakh in addition to free boarding and lodging? Incidentally, a large number of post graduate technical workers from India employed in US are paid about $4500 to 6000 US dollars per month as their monthly salary without any boarding or lodging. Where is the logic?

Most Indian diplomats as well as those from other developing countries are known to take their domestic help from their respective countries while proceeding on postings abroad including to the US as wages payable there are beyond their paying capacity. Isn’t that the reason why US companies outsource some of the service sector related work to Indian companies working from India? Normally such domestic workers in US are provided free boarding and lodging facilities and are paid the higher bracket of the wages applicable in their own countries. The entire salary therefore becomes a saving for the employed.

Are all diplomats serving in US from various countries of the world paying a monthly salary of $4500 US dollars to their domestic workers? If not, are they not violating US rules? Have their domestic helps been given an A3 visa based on actual wages declared by the diplomats concerned in their respective employment contracts which is lesser than the minimum wages payable in US? Or have the diplomats made false statements in respect of the salary being paid to their domestic helps? If they are indeed paying lesser salaries or have made false statements, why has the Indian diplomat and specifically Ms. Khobragade been singled out and targeted?

This system adopted by Ms. Khobragade seems to be the usual practice of employing domestic aids amongst at least the Indian diplomats. This perhaps is in the knowledge of the MEA. That being so, why did the US Government not consider it necessary to discuss the matter with the Government of India? The Indian Foreign Secretary was in US just a day before the arrest and the matter could have been resolved without much ado. It therefore appears that the aim was to humiliate the particular diplomat and perhaps India in the larger context.

All the Indian diplomats with Indian diplomatic passports and officials with Indian official passports are being paid wages as per Indian rules and norms. Ms. Richard has been issued with an official Indian Passport. For all purposes she is an official of the Government of India. Why is it that she alone amongst the Indian Staff is required to be paid the US rates of salary? The fact is some of the lower staff working in Indian diplomatic missions in US may not be getting paid $4500 as their monthly salary.

Ms. Richard, sometime after her arrival in US, it seems had sought Khobragade’s permission to take up another part-time job in New York. Considering that taking up an employment in US requires a H1B visa which she did not possess and the security implications involved she was perhaps denied permission. However she went missing on June 23, 2013.

Ms. Khobragade tried to report the matter to New York Police Department (NYPD) but was unsuccessful in lodging a complaint. She then approached the Office of the Foreign Missions (OFM) and sought their help in tracing the domestic help. On the advice of the OFM, Khobragade went to file a missing person’s report with the police but was informed that she could not, since Richard was an adult, and that such a report could only be lodged by a member of her family.

The missing person’s report was finally filed by the Police on July, 01, 2013. If such a report could be filed then, why not earlier when the matter was first reported? Why was the diplomat made to run from pillar to post to get a missing person’s report lodged with the Police? What is one expected to do when he gets to know that an individual has gone missing? Start searching for a member of his or her family and waste valuable time? Even if that was the case, why wasn’t the Indian diplomat informed the correct procedure and saved much of the harassment and mental torcher?

When Sangeeta’s husband, was contacted, he refused to file a Missing Person’s Report, probably because he knew the whereabouts of his wife. How did that happen? Either he was informed of the matter by one of the departments of the US Government or his wife has been in touch with him. If she was in police custody, would the authorities have provided such an open ended privilege to her, a facility which according to media reports was denied to the Indian diplomat? Or was she under the protection of some US department?

On July 15, and 19, 2013, Philip Richard, Ms. Richard’s husband filed a writ petition against Khobragade and the Union of India, alleging that his wife Sangeeta Richard was in police custody in New York since July 8, 2013, charging the Indian diplomat with “slave labour” and illegally making Sangeeta sign a ‘second contract’ with far less pay and perks. The Union of India was accused of not paying according to the requirements of the local law. Richard withdrew his writ petition four days later. If the missing person was indeed in NYPD’s custody as stated in the writ petition, why was Ms. Khobargade not informed by the police about the status of her missing person’s complaint? Since Ms Richard was an Indian official passport holder, wasn’t it the responsibility of the NYPD to inform the Government of India of the status of the individual?

Ms Richard knowing fully well that she had already signed the ‘First Contract’ signed the Second Contract. Why did she agree to sign the ‘Second Contract’? Was she forced to sign the ‘Second Contract’? Does this not show that Ms. Richard was fully aware of the arrangement and was trying to exploit the situation probably with intent to migrate to US?

On July, 01, 2013, a woman claiming to be the Richard’s lawyer had called up Khobragade to stipulate conditions for forestalling Ms. Richard from going to the court. The conditions include, the Indian diplomat should sign the 566 Form authorising the maid to terminate her employment, get her visa status changed from official to normal visa, and, to compensate her for 19 hours of work per day. Khobragade refused to negotiate on phone, insisting that the caller identify herself. The next day Khobragade informed the OFM about these developments in writing, seeking NYPD’s support in ascertaining the identity of the caller and her links with Richard, given that the conversations clearly indicate that the runaway maid was attempting to migrate to the US illegally and was trying to extort money by making false accusations. Ms. Khobragade had also filed a complaint with NYPD. The US embassy in New Delhi was also briefed by the MEA about the missing aid. Reports were filed with the US State Department and NYPD, and a FIR filed in India against Sangeeta Richard. The assistance of the State Department and US Embassy was emphatically solicited in locating the maid and sending her back to India to preempt this being used as an attempt to help an illegal immigrant. Similar requests were made by the Indian embassy in Washington to the US State Department. No action was taken.

Prompted by lack of cooperation by Ms. Sangeeta’s husband, the MEA advised Khobragade to file a First Information Report in Delhi against the Richard’s family for willful deceit and attempt to cheat with a view to illegally migrate to the US employing illegal means. Based on MEA’s advice, the diplomat also filed an anticipatory anti- suit injunction in the Delhi High Court so as to preempt Ms. Richard from filing any case in the US and to avoid litigation in that country.

Delhi High Court issued an ex- parte ad interim injunction against Philip and Sangeeta Richard on September, 20, 2013, restraining them from initiating any legal action or proceedings against Khobragade in any Court / Tribunal / Forum outside India with regard to her employment. On November, 19, 2013, Metropolitan Magistrate of South District, New Delhi, also issued a non bailable arrest warrant against Sangeeta Richard which was forwarded to the US State Department and the US Embassy in India asking them to instruct the authorities concerned to arrest and repatriate the maid to India. No action has been taken by the US. On the other hand the Indian diplomat was arrested and humiliated disregarding Delhi High Court’s injunction orders.

In the meanwhile on July, 08, 2013, Khobragade was called to an immigration lawyer’s office, to discuss terms of settlement with Richard. Accompanied by the consulate officers, Khobragade met Ms. Richard who sought a payment of $ 10,000 and grant of an ordinary Indian passport along with immigration relief required to stay on in the US on that ordinary passport. Ms. Richard was categorically informed by the Consulate officials that she cannot remain in the US under any circumstances without legal authorisation, and that she should return to India as per her contract with Khobragade. Richard was also informed that any discussions over salary or working hours could be settled in the consulate before her return to India. Ms. Richard negated the suggestion stating that she wants to remain in the US. A complaint to the NYPD on the matter was made but was not responded to, as usual. The Government of India revoked Richard’s passport and a notice for termination of her personal identity was also given to OFM with effect from June 22, 2013. Richard is now staying in the US illegally.

Despite these pleas from the Government of India, Ms. Khobragade was arrested on December, 12, 2013 for visa fraud after she had dropped her daughter to the school on the road. Her bail was posted at $ 250,000. Her passport was seized, and was directed not to leave the country or seek another travel document. She could however travel within the US after notifying authorities. Media also reported that the diplomat was permitted to make only one call after the arrest.

What was the hurry in arresting the diplomat in such circumstances? Why on a public road? Could the Indian Ambassador not have been informed in time to enable him to make arrangements for the safety and care of the diplomat’s children? How was she expected to manage her children being in jail? Mother is a vital comfort factor for minor children especially in India. Was this factor taken into account by those who arrested her? When the child came out of the school how was the child expected to cope with the news that her mother has been arrested and was in jail? A country which shouts ‘human rights’ from roof top ought to have known better about minor children’s care and rights.

At this point the Richards connection to US embassy officials would be relevant. Media reports suggest Sangeeta Richard was previously employed by a senior US diplomat (pages 6 & 7). Her parents in laws, the parents of Philip live in the house of a US diplomat at 5, Aurangzeb Lane in New Delhi and the premises used to be the residence of the US embassy’s political counselor. Earlier the house was occupied by Geoff Pyatt, Ted Osius and Uzra Beya. Philip’s mother worked for the Pyatts as their cook, and the father was employed there as well. The house is currently occupied by a senior US diplomat, and the Richards’ continue to live there.

The treachery behind the episode is evident from the fact that on December, 10, 2013, two days before the diplomat’s arrest, Ms. Richards’s husband, Philip and two children were quietly whisked away to the US by an Air India flight. The whole world knows how difficult it is to get a US visa. How was this visa arranged? How and why did the US authorities get in direct contact with the family and flew them out of India into US? Who paid for their airfare? Who is footing their boarding and lodging charges in New York? Why was this done without any information to the Government of India even though the Indian Foreign Secretary was in US when this operation was being planned or perhaps in progress? Was this conspiracy aimed at facilitating the permanent immigration of Richard’s family to US? Who was behind the conspiracy?

Does the US do this in respect of every case of visa fraud and false statement? The only instance I remember when US had flown the family in this manner is that of Mr Ravinder Singh an officer of the R&AW, the Indian external intelligence agency. He was alleged to be a mole of CIA, the US intelligence agency. The question is why was Ms. Richard so very important for the US? Is there a similar conspiracy angle to the entire story?

As for the Indian Government, it was well aware of the manner in which Indian diplomats took their domestic help to the US and the complications involved in the process. As an institution responsible for the safety, prestige and morale of the Indian diplomatic corps, it ought to have resolved the issue with the US Government or given clear directions to Indian diplomats going to the US not to take domestic helps with them. It failed in its responsibility.

It is time India realised that diplomacy is not appeasement. US acted in this manner because it was confident that it could do this and get away with it. Could US have done this with Russia or China? Or could they have stripped and carried out a cavity search of a lady leave alone a diplomat from the Muslim world? US will respect India only if it learns to be correct and firm in its dealings.

DISCLAIMER : Views expressed above are the author's own.

Comments on this post are closed now

Be the first one to review.

Author

Brigadier (retd) V Mahalingam, has held varying command and staff appointments in his 35 years of Army service. He specializes in security related matters and is a leadership trainer. His areas of interest include national security, defence and security forces, governance, and politics.

Brigadier (retd) V Mahalingam, has held varying command and staff appointments in his 35 years of Army service. He specializes in security related matters a. . .